Second, Musk and Zuckerberg aren’t foreign states, try to stay on topic.

I’m super confused by what chain of reasoning would lead you to say this. First, it doesn’t matter at all that they’re not foreign states, they still have interests directly opposed to the vast majority of Americans. Second, we’re talking about whether the American government has the ability to influence Americans’ media diet in a way comparable to what Russia does, so the point that they’re “not foreign governments” is doubly confusing.

None of this made any sense. What don’t you understand? Westerners see the charlatan grifters that Russians fund on YouTube/Rumble because it isn’t blocked, meanwhile the Russian population has no access to Wikipedia and wouldn’t be able to see “western propaganda” on YouTube because it is blocked. Duh

Your argument is that Russian propaganda is effective because they’re able to censor platforms with conflicting views, but they aren’t able to control what media Americans have access to, meaning that your position makes absolutely zero sense.

Also, I’m not talking about the US government using propaganda to influence Russian citizens, I’m talking about the US government using propaganda to influence US citizens. Which seems to be a fully alien concept to you. But US citizens have access to the same set of media that could be used to host either Russian or American propaganda, it’s an even playing field. Except the US has more money and a major home field advantage, so why would Russian propaganda be so much more effective? It’s nonsense, and there are much simpler, more logical explanations.